Tuesday, March 27, 2012

With the
NDP leadership race and showcase weekend in the books, there are some lessons the Liberal
Party should draw from the experience as we prepare for our own leadership
vote, scheduled for some time next spring.

I think the
first lesson is that you need a strong field of candidates to generate any kind
of public and media interest and being new life into the party; coronations
aren’t exciting at all. But that’s an obvious one. I think lessons can be drawn
in two main areas: the system of voting, and the leadership weekend.

The
Leadership Weekend

Love them
or hate them, delegated leadership conventions were exciting. They’re now,
though, a thing of the past. That’s a positive in that the variations of one
member, one vote that have replaced them are far more democratic and more
accurately reflects the will of all party members, not just those than can get
elected as delegates and can afford to go. It does, though, remove some of the
excitement from the equation, and leaves the media without something to cover.

Which was
really what the NDP’s weekend leadership event in Toronto was all about. It was
a made for TV spectacle designed to replicate some of the elements of a
traditional delegated convention (the candidate showcases, flash mobs, scrums)
and give the media somewhere to focus and ground their attention and coverage.
It actually worked so well at times we forgot we weren’t covering a traditional
delegated convention, and that most of the voting had already happened or was happening
online elsewhere.

The event
was also useful to bring nearly 5000 NDP supporters together for the shared
experience of picking their next leader and, as it wasn’t delegated,
accessibility wasn’t as much of an issue.

Bringing
together the media, the pundits, party staffer and leadership candidates with
supporters all in both gives the media a way to cover the news and allowed the
party to at least try to control the story somewhat, as well as respond on the
fly as events transpire. The delays caused by issues with the voting system
aside, the weekend was a strong success in terms of generating the volume and
tone of media coverage the NDP was looking for, and a record number ofjournalists were accredited for the event.

While the
level of coverage can partially be attributed to factors the Liberals can’t
replicate, such as the fact they were picking a new opposition leader and a successor
to the late Jack Layton, the NDP has still provided a model we would do well to
replicate.

I would
also hold our event in the Toronto area, as it has both the highest
concentration of media in the country, as well as the largest remaining pool of
Liberal supporters to draw into the event. As this isn’t a delegated event, I’m
less worried about the need to move it around the country. (And besides,
Toronto is actually due.) It’s about maximizing member/supporter and media
attendance.

We should
do the candidate showcases, fete our outgoing interim leader (assuming he’s not
running for the permanent gig), and pump people up about being Liberals. We
need a focal point to make the leadership selection real not just for the
media, but for Liberals and Canadians as well, and give the new leader a launching pad.

I’d also
encourage the organization of regional satellite events to bring local Liberals
together to watch the proceedings, cast their votes and experience the event as
a shared experience.

The Voting
System

First, I
should note one key difference between the NDP and Liberal methods of
leadership selection. The NDP has a system of “pure” one member, one vote. On
the plus side, every vote is equal, but on the down side, if one region (say,
B.C.) has most of the members, it also has most of the say. The Liberals, like
the Conservatives, have a regionally weighted system: Each riding, despite the
number of members and supporters, is equal, receiving 100 points to be
distributed amongst the candidates based on the percentage vote of its voters.
So while someone voting in a riding with lots of members may have their vote somewhat
diluted compared to a voter in a less populous riding, every region of the
country is equal and a leader needs pan-Canadian support to be elected.

So in
essence, our system is slightly more complicated than the NDP’s. There’s also
the wrinkle of our new supporter system, which has the potential to
substantially increase the potential pool of voters. It makes some sort of
online and/or phone voting system a necessity. However, with the problems the
BC Liberals had with getting PINs to members before their leadership vote, and
the major troubles the NDP experience this weekend with an alleged DirectedDenial of Service attack possibly disenfranchising thousands, online voting is
not without its issues.

Despite the
difficulties though, on paper I loved the two-phase NDP plan. In the first
phase, voters could choose to submit a complete preferential ballot, and they’re
done. Or they could take part in phase two, voting one ballot at a time, so
they can react to the results of each ballot. Were I an NDPer, I would have
opted for the second option.

I’d urge
the Liberal national executive to immediately begin researching online voting
systems, and exploring ways to minimize the risk of such attacks occurring or
minimizing the impact if they do. If we can’t assure ourselves that we can
create a safe and secure online system, we need to make sure we have reliable
backups, such as a phone system, in place. This research and work should be
happening now. It is vital that Liberals, Canadians and potential candidates
have faith in the integrity and stability of the system we’ll use.

Of course,
the tried and true option is voting by paper, either the day of the event or in
advance by mail. Both have their issues. Particularly if many supporters sign
up, organizing polling places across the county is both logistically
challenging and expensive, and particularly tough for rural ridings that both
lack volunteers and, with their size, would require multiple polls. And both an
in-person or mail-in vote would require a preferential ballot, which lacks the
drama of ballot by ballot voting.

Personally,
I do favour the two-option approach the NDP used. And the more people that opt
for phase two, the more potential for drama on leadership weekend. But we need
to ensure first that we can build a stable and safe system that will allow everyone
that wishes to participate to cast their votes. That must be the top priority.